388 replies to this topic

[thecasinoroyale]

I am SO down for Monica to return. That'd be awesome.

And the problem I think with Bond having reconstructive operations on his face etc for a new actor means they will have to do the same thing for a more "real" take for each actor in the future? It'd be almost like a comical event to happen for audiences guessing what happens to Bond next time - face blown off or mauled by a cat or something.

And I also think bringing personal aspects like marriage and kids into Craig's portrayal so near to his end (I assume) is too much to tie up with another actor who deserves a bit of a "clean slate" to establish his persona. Then you make James Bond a family man...and he isn't. Never would be or should be. It's not him. It's something he can never have. This is an action / spy series, not a drama.

[Surrie]

I am SO down for Monica to return. That'd be awesome.

And the problem I think with Bond having reconstructive operations on his face etc for a new actor means they will have to do the same thing for a more "real" take for each actor in the future? It'd be almost like a comical event to happen for audiences guessing what happens to Bond next time - face blown off or mauled by a cat or something.

And I also think bringing personal aspects like marriage and kids into Craig's portrayal so near to his end (I assume) is too much to tie up with another actor who deserves a bit of a "clean slate" to establish his persona. Then you make James Bond a family man...and he isn't. Never would be or should be. It's not him. It's something he can never have. This is an action / spy series, not a drama.

 

Action/spy series it is, but Craig's era have seen the producers show Bond in a more humanistic and vulnerable light. If ever there was a time to touch upon a 'family' for him it's now, and I feel that only Craig could deliver that with Seydoux. 

Edited by Surrie, 17 November 2015 - 04:13 PM.

[thecasinoroyale]

But doesn't that worry you about what James Bond is becoming, or become? We love our humane hero, but if he gets TOO humane, it detracts from the escapism of his secret agent universe we want to visit. If he ends up in a domestic with Swann it'll be very odd to see. I mean, it might work as said before to show what he chooses - duty or a life, so we all know where he stands once the novelty has worn off.

[Surrie]

It does worry me, and it did when the producers took this route. However, the decision was made in 2006 to take Bond through this more humanistic journey and they could finish it off nicely by ending Craig's era in this way. But, only if they bring in a new actor for Bond 26 and continue in the timeline of where Brosnan left off - thus leaving Craig's era films as stand-alone movies. That way we can all have a different opinion of where they fit into the Bond universe timeline, and our hero can continue to be the Spy we all love watching!

[coco1997]

I'm strongly suspecting we will not see Bond actually reproduce ever in the films....

 

I disagree, especially if the Craig films are being treated as a separate timeline from whatever the next iteration of the franchise is post-Craig, That's assuming they continue the Madeleine story in BOND 25/SHATTERHAND and she survives. If BOND 25/SHATTERHAND is indeed Craig's final film, this is the kind of plot twist I could see EON dropping on us before rebooting the series again with BOND 26.

[Dustin]

If there is an actor they might tackle it with it's probably Craig, agreed. But I think the inclusion of kids, of a pregnant - and this strongly implies permanent love interest - would shift the entire Bond balance in a direction that would not mix with the - in the end pretty juvenile - fantasy of the super-agent Bond is supposed to be. Remember, they already came close to this in one of the early QOS drafts (although it was supposed to be Vesper's child, not Bond's). And they shied away from it again.

Sure, Craig's era earned its own self-contained universe. But Bond is not supposed to care beyond what we see on the screen. Eon sell a boys fantasy, exciting and dangerous and spicy. Nappies and rings and mortgages don't mix with that, boys don't dream about happily-ever-after, they dream about having sex without consequences, booze without hangover and buy grotty trash with a platinum credit card. If Eon opens the door into the real world the mirror through which we follow Bond's adventures would shatter. Bond might be hit a stupid stray bullet, by an old blind lady overlooking his Aston. Or by a bloody heart attack. All this needs not happen, but we would know it could.

And so would Bond. It would no longer be the series we used to know. And I'm not sure it could ever return to that state.

[JSDude1]

Disagree.

 

First I wouldn't make Craig's Era a stand along time line unconnected to future 007 Adventures.  No more reboots-even if it mean not rebooting back to the DN-DAD timeline.

 

I also disagree that he being in a family with Swan even if she is separated from him for her safety, would detract from the James Bond image.  It is not unprecedented as this would would merely be a continuation of the story that was hinted at OHMSS..

 

Though that domestic life was cut short by Blofeld, Bunt, obviously..

[DaveBond21]

I don't get this whole thing about Madeline needing to be in the next one.

 

The only time a Bond girl has returned was Sylvia way back in 1963. We didn't discuss Natalya having to be in TND or Christmas Jones needing to be back at the start of DAD.

[Tiin007]

I don't get this whole thing about Madeline needing to be in the next one.

 

The only time a Bond girl has returned was Sylvia way back in 1963. We didn't discuss Natalya having to be in TND or Christmas Jones needing to be back at the start of DAD.

 

I think the discussion arises from the ambiguity of the final couple scenes. Are we to assume that Bond's tossing of the gun and leaving with Madeline constituted him quitting the service (in much the same way that he resigned for Vesper), or was it merely a happy ending with no long-term career implications? What did Q mean when he said to Bond "I thought you had left"? 

[DaveBond21]

 

I don't get this whole thing about Madeline needing to be in the next one.

 

The only time a Bond girl has returned was Sylvia way back in 1963. We didn't discuss Natalya having to be in TND or Christmas Jones needing to be back at the start of DAD.

 

I think the discussion arises from the ambiguity of the final couple scenes. Are we to assume that Bond's tossing of the gun and leaving with Madeline constituted him quitting the service (in much the same way that he resigned for Vesper), or was it merely a happy ending with no long-term career implications? What did Q mean when he said to Bond "I thought you had left"? 

 

 

I thought it was in case Daniel Craig leaves the role, it gave him a fitting send-off (something Roger Moore didn't get). 

 

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

[Dustin]

I also disagree that he being in a family with Swan even if she is separated from him for her safety, would detract from the James Bond image. It is not unprecedented as this would would merely be a continuation of the story that was hinted at OHMSS..

Though that domestic life was cut short by Blofeld, Bunt, obviously..

It was cut short by Fleming, for the reasons I stated above.

Mind you, I'm not against it - I just have my doubts Eon is willing to master this kind of unprecedented move for Bond. I'm confident the current team could if they wanted to. But it's a different quality from casting a blond actor and showing him with shaky hands - which is to this day the boldest move they made with regards to the central character.

[sharpshooter]

I don't get this whole thing about Madeline needing to be in the next one.

It's largely the idea she could be Craig's version of Tracy.

[DaveBond21]

 

I don't get this whole thing about Madeline needing to be in the next one.

It's largely the idea she could be Craig's version of Tracy.

 

 

Yes but where has it come from? He didn't marry her.

[sharpshooter]

The original ending had Bond saying "we have all the time in the world." That was removed as we know, but the possibility for such an arc still exists.

[Dustin]

The original ending had Bond saying "we have all the time in the world." That was removed as we know, but the possibility for such an arc still exists.

The original ending of SPECTRE? Would have been too obvious probably, all and sundry would know what comes next. This way they still have all options.

[Surrie]

From a female point of view - I have to agree that it would be a big risk for the producers to hint at a family life for Bond, but it would make sense for them to finish off Craig's era in such a way, and it's not as if Fleming himself hadn't even hinted at this years ago anyway (YOLT). I also think it would be the perfect time to do so with the return of Blofeld, Swann could be Tracey. The only reason I think we are discussing the option of Seydoux returning for Bond 25 is the fact that IMO Swann and Bond worked so well together and the timing in Craig's universe seems right. 

 

Had any of this ever been mentioned in Moore or Brosnan's era I would have been very unhappy about it. Bond is suppose to only be interested in his latest conquest and killing the bad guy for God sake! BUT, Craig's Bond isn't all about that. The producers have made him stand apart from the previous actors because of the focus they have placed on his heartache and incessant need to save the woman he loves. 

 

With all this in mind, it would make sense to perhaps include Swann in his final film (if he does another one) and then draw a line under the sand for Bond 26 and the new actor. That way Craig's universe stands alone and we have benefitted from seeing a different side to Bond, but we can now go on and watch Bond behave in the traditional way we have known him to with a new actor. 

[Dustin]

Well, it's certainly a possibility that's on the table, and mostly because of Craig and what he managed to do with his portrayal of Bond. It's hard to imagine anything close to it with most other Bonds.

[Surrie]

Well, it's certainly a possibility that's on the table, and mostly because of Craig and what he managed to do with his portrayal of Bond. It's hard to imagine anything close to it with most other Bonds.

 

Agreed!

[Tiin007]

 

 

I don't get this whole thing about Madeline needing to be in the next one.

 

The only time a Bond girl has returned was Sylvia way back in 1963. We didn't discuss Natalya having to be in TND or Christmas Jones needing to be back at the start of DAD.

 

I think the discussion arises from the ambiguity of the final couple scenes. Are we to assume that Bond's tossing of the gun and leaving with Madeline constituted him quitting the service (in much the same way that he resigned for Vesper), or was it merely a happy ending with no long-term career implications? What did Q mean when he said to Bond "I thought you had left"? 

 

 

I thought it was in case Daniel Craig leaves the role, it gave him a fitting send-off (something Roger Moore didn't get). 

 

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

 

Yes, and I think that is the point. If Craig leaves now, the "fitting send-off" would be his resignation from the service ("choosing" the life of something other than an assassin). But if Craig returns, they may need to find some excuse to "bring Bond back" to the service, as the assumption is that he is with Madeline.

 

My preference, though, would be for Craig to return and EON to treat this as simply a happy ending to the movie SPECTRE, and not as Bond's resignation. That way, Madeline does not need to return, and it would mean that we did not repeat this rogue / being fired / resigning trope once again so soon.

[Dustin]

I don't think it's that hard to bring Bond back either way; SPECTRE's end was still handled fairly ambiguous and many viewers wouldn't even have picked up on Bond leaving SIS had it not been for Mendes admitting this was also his interpretation in an interview. Eon is by no means obliged to agree with his view, they could start BOND 25 in any manner they see fit.

[Surrie]

It would be nice if they started Bond 25 without having to mention Madeleine, having just let the characters go off at the end of SPECTRE. In previous Bond movies, many, many final scenes included Bond with the Bond girl for them to never be mentioned again in the following film. I don't see anything wrong with this, although I suspect the production and creative teams won't leave it this way. 

[agentbug]

Having thought about it myself and read the comments here, it seems we have no idea what they're going to do... I hope they do (though Wilson has said not...)

 

In an interview Mendes said he could see them starting afresh with the next film (he implied with a new actor if he didn't state this) and said 'off the top of his head he could give 3 or 4 ways it could go'... This worries me slightly, partly becasue I can only think of one (a paired down Dr No obstacle course type film / sequence), and partly because it shouldn't be that easy... 'Here's 4 'out there' ideas, pick one!' Hmmm.

[Professor Pi]

If/when Craig comes back, I think we will see Madeleine again.  It's not unprecedented.  This was their plan for Tracy, but to kill Swann off would be too unoriginal and repetitive.  EON has talked about this idea before.  Vesper's child.  Wai Lin was in the DAD script originally, but Michelle Yeoh was unavailable.  Barbara has talked about the possibility of seeing Camille Montes in the series, but she's not the one they'll bring back.  If they are looking for serious dramatic angles, this is the way to go.  Shake up the Bond formula.  And it's roots (baby Bond out there) has its foundations in Fleming's original source material.

 

Bond still goes back to the service.  We don't see him vacuuming and going to the grocery store, for goodness sake ("bloody cleanup in aisle 9.")  And the notion of plastic surgery isn't explicitly shown.  SPECTRE says something about changing Bond into someone unrecognizable to MI6.  We just accept a change in actor for Bond26 without delving too much into it.   The amnesiac story line also covers this transition so they could ignore it if they want to, or continue on as they did in the Moore/Dalton/Brosnan years.  Fans can debate if it really is canon, like whether Bond actually died at the beginning of YOLT, or in prison in DAD, or in the chair in SPECTRE (for continuity conspiracy theorists trying to explain badly written scripts' dreamlike plot points.)

 

EON got lambasted for returning too much to formula in SPECTRE, even though that's not the film's problems (third act, villain motive and connection to Bond.)  However,  I suspect they will react to it in the next film, much like their course corrections after YOLT/MR/DAD.  If Skyfall was about mothers, and Spectre about fathers, what will Craig's next be about?  If handled carefully, it can be done well.

[Surrie]

It's certainly very exciting thinking about the possibilities of Bond 25, even more so if it's Craig's last film!

[DamnCoffee]

Still not finished my Bond 25 outline yet but it's shaping together nicely.

 

Here's my cast list

 

Shatterhand (2018)
Directed by Sam Mendes
Produced by Michael G Wilson and Barbara Broccoli
Cinematography by Roger Deakins
Music by David Arnold

Daniel Craig - James Bond
Ernst Stavro Blofeld - Christoph Waltz
Irma Bunt - Tilda Swinton
Mr Hinx - Dave Bautista
Seraffimo Spang - Peter Dinklage
Jack Spang - Billy Bob Thornton   
Felix Leiter - Jeffrey Wright
Tiger Tanaka - Ken Watanabe
M - Ralph Fiennes
Q - Ben Whishaw
Moneypenny - Naomi Harris
The Minister of Defence - Charles Dance
Madeline Swann - Léa Seydoux
 

[Professor Pi]

I also had more specific ideas about a Garden of Death story.  SPECTRE mentions counterfeit pharmaceuticals, so this 'garden' could be the source of their supplies and R & D.  The 'suicide' plot point could be about OD'ing on prescription meds (there'd be a sudden rise in that.)  Due to a Japanese diplomat's connection somehow, Bond is sent to investigate.  Dr. Guntram Shatterhand is a real person wearing the samurai costume around the castle.  But Bond uncovers him as Blofeld.  Blofeld had killed Shatterhand and taken his identity, much like he did with Oberhauser (and Willard Whyte in another universe.)  Half-brother plot point explained and discarded!  Blofeld's chameleon like traits from the books exemplified.  Blofeld gives his speech to Bond from the YOLT novel about his motivations.

 

The title should be "The Garden of Death" and not "Shatterhand."  Another CBn poster noted that CR and SF are locations and QoS/SP are organizations, and that's what changed my mind about the title.  So in keeping with the pattern, the odd numbered Craig Bond is named after the location.  (Plus, they can't really get away with Shatterhand being a big titular twist...yet again.  It can be used as a minor plot point though.)  Walz might be an uncredited casting if you really want a twist though.

 

The working title for LALD novel was "The Undertaker's Wind" and that fits the theme of Bond brainwashed to assassinate M, then going after the bad guys in the rest of Bond 26.  Since they didn't use "Property of a Lady" for QoS (Vesper's necklace/M's 007 agent being the 'property'), it could now refer to agent Bond serving his Queen and Country, should EON opt to use that title.  Fortunately, we can lay "The Hildebrand Rarity" to rest as a title now.  "Risico" could be used at anytime for just about anything.

[Harmsway]

It would be nice if they started Bond 25 without having to mention Madeleine, having just let the characters go off at the end of SPECTRE. In previous Bond movies, many, many final scenes included Bond with the Bond girl for them to never be mentioned again in the following film. I don't see anything wrong with this, although I suspect the production and creative teams won't leave it this way.

If they do that, it'll be a total betrayal of the thematic and character progressions made in SPECTRE.

[Professor Pi]

Damncoffee, I like your composer and casting choices.  I was actually thinking of Tilda Swanson and Ken Watanable for precisely those roles!  And Charles Dance would make a great Minister of Defence!  (Also nice since he once played Ian Fleming.)

[Dustin]

It would be nice if they started Bond 25 without having to mention Madeleine, having just let the characters go off at the end of SPECTRE. In previous Bond movies, many, many final scenes included Bond with the Bond girl for them to never be mentioned again in the following film. I don't see anything wrong with this, although I suspect the production and creative teams won't leave it this way.

If they do that, it'll be a total betrayal of the thematic and character progressions made in SPECTRE.

Sure. But that's perhaps more due to the fault said progressions were not nearly as developed and articulate as they should have been. For many casual viewers SPECTRE had exactly the back-to-business feel to it we often missed in Craig's tenure. The full impact of the final frames was largely lost on many.

[Professor Pi]

Sort of like DAF after its title sequence (which is why I watch in the order of YOLT/DAF/OHMSS.)